Subject: Application of logic.

I'd like to respond to Julio's remarks.

No, it wouldn't be sensible to 'reject the application of logical
method ... to any theoretical purpose', because there's a lot
of it about. Mathematics, for example, works precisely in that
way. What I want to say is rather (1) that this procedure has
a particular social context, relating to money, the division
of labour, the State, and (2) that its use in discussing the categories
of political and economic life must stand in the way of any questions
being asked about the human content of these categories. It leads
to each category being accepted as 'natural' or a necessary part
of all social being, while its historical specificity is rendered
invisible.

Thus an economist can 'apply' mathematical and statistical methods,
relating econometric variables as if they were like mass, acceleration,
force in mechanics. The actual exploitative and oppressive content
of the economic situation, in which people are treated like things
and vice versa, can't then be thought about at all. (In my Tony
Smith article - which Andy hopes to make available on the site
- I compared the thinking of an economist with an attempt to tell
jokes to a computer.)

Although he was the first to describe the syllogism, Aristotle
uses it only to relate essences, not to connect things. Hegel
also wants to give the categories of logic ontological meanings.
Marx praises him for this, but points out the limitations of what
he can do with it.